8 Movies That Should Never Have Been Remade

I watched the 2000 version of Bedazzled before I'd seen the original  In fact, when I saw the Brendan Fraser/Elizabeth Hurley remake, I didn't even know that it was a remake. And, in fairness, I thought it was an okay film.

Elizabeth Hurley isn't the best actor in the world, but the script was not too bad and there were some funny moments.

So, this got me interested in the 1967 original comedic take on the age-old Faustian story.

When I got around to watching the original Bedazzled, I quickly realized that the remake couldn't hold a candle to the original.

Cook and Moore's script is much cleverer and more subtle in its humor and its gentle teasing of Judeo-Christian myth.

It almost goes without saying that the performances in the original are far superior.

Now, truthfully, I can't bring myself to watch the Bedazzled of 2000, because I'm constantly comparing it unfavorably with 1967's version. And that, to my mind, is the trademark of a bad remake.

Born Yesterday is one of my all-time favorite films from the Golden Era of Hollywood. Originally a Broadway play, in which Judy Holliday brought the wonderful Bille Dawn to life, the movie went on to score her an Oscar.

Ironically, legend has it that studio execs were 'iffy' about her ability to perform the role on camera, and she only secured the part after Katherine Hepburn helped raise her profile by spreading rumors that Holliday was stealing the limelight from her in Adam's Rib.

Fast forward a little over forty years and it's Melanie Griffith who takes on the mantel of Billie Dawn. Now, I've nothing against Melanie Griffith and she does a passable job as the ditzy blonde. However, when a part has been performed so masterfully, a remake will always pale in comparison.

The original Born Yesterday is a timeless classic, it doesn't need jazzing up or modernizing to appeal to fresh audiences. It's just as pertinent and just as funny now, as it was sixty years ago.

I have nothing against Russell Brand or Helen Mirren, but what where they thinking when they accepted roles in the remake of a comic classic?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the original Arthur is untouchably perfect cinema - there are a few things, such as Susan's desire to be with Arthur, that are inexplicable outside the realms of fantasy, but that does not stretch credulity so far as to ruin a viewer's willing suspension of disbelief - at least, in my opinion.

What makes the original Arthur so good is the wonderful and unexpected chemistry between Liza Minnelli and Dudley Moore. And even though it probably isn't the role he would want to be remembered for, John Gielgud did a fabulous job as the sardonic, but lovable Hobson.

The casting could never be replicated, so the success of the movie can never be replicated. Not to mention, that song!

Often, the remake falls foul in one simple way - it's not the story that can't be redone, it's that a particular role is so inextricably linked to one actor, that any attempt to rehash it will result in...well, a hash.

And this is especially true of a part that transcends several films.

Inspector Clouseau is one of those roles.

Alan Arkin couldn't pull it off particularly successfully and Steve Martin certainly doesn't. Clouseau has always and will always belong to Peter Sellers.

We've got to remember that in the original Pink Panther movie, Sellers' role was a fairly minor one. However, he stole the 'show', prompting numerous sequels - of varying quality. It's really, really stupid for any actor to believe that he can match that performance, much less top it.

The original The Flight of The Phoenix could actually have been a stage play, because although it was set in the aftermath of a plane crash, it wasn't really about the aftermath of a plane crash.

The battle to rebuild the Phoenix was the conflict in which the real drama, the human drama, took place.

Where the remake goes so wrong is that it moves the drama, by placing the focus not on the mysterious backgrounds of the passengers, but on the great cinematography and special effects that it can offer.

It's a bit like remaking Brief Encounter and having its principal focus on flashy high-speed trains and panoramic views.

The Flight of The Phoenix is claustrophobic and the interest is created out of the characters' struggles in those close quarters, by opening it up (in an attempt presumably to make it look more modern) what the remake actually does is kill the real drama of the story.